Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; California State Implementation Plan Revision, Antelope Valley Air Pollution Control District

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[CA 210-0133; FRL-6306-8]

Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; California

State Implementation Plan Revision, Antelope Valley Air Pollution

Control District

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: EPA is finalizing the approval of revisions to the California

State Implementation Plan (SIP) proposed in the Federal Register on

January 4, 1999, 64 FR 67. The revisions concern the recission of

administrative rules from the Antelope Valley Air Pollution Control

District (AVAPCD). These rules concern conduct and procedure governing

hearings by the governing board on permit appeals. The intended effect

of this approval action is to bring the AVAPCD SIP up to date in

accordance with the requirements of the Clean Air Act, as amended in

1990 (CAA or the Act). EPA is finalizing the approval of these

recissions from the AVAPCD portion of the California SIP under

provisions of the CAA regarding EPA action on SIP submittals, SIPs for

national primary and secondary ambient air quality standards and plan

requirements for nonattainment areas.

EFFECTIVE DATE: This action is effective on April 9, 1999.

ADDRESSES: Copies of the rule recissions and EPA's evaluation report

for each rule are available for public inspection at EPA's Region IX

office during normal business hours. Copies of the submitted rule

recissions are available for inspection at the following locations:

Rulemaking Office (AIR-4), Air Division, U.S. Environmental Protection

Agency, Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA 94105

Environmental Protection Agency, Air Docket (6102), 401 ``M'' Street,

SW, Washington, DC 20460

California Air Resources Board, Stationary Source Division, Rule

Evaluation Section, 2020 ``L'' Street, Sacramento, CA 95812.

Antelope Valley Air Pollution Control District, 43301 Division Street,

Suite 206, Lancaster, CA 93539-4409

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Julie A. Rose, Rulemaking Office,

(AIR-4), Air Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region IX,

75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA 94105, Telephone: (415) 744-

1184.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Applicability

The rules being rescinded from the AVAPCD portion of the California

SIP include: AVAPCD Regulation XII, Rules of Practice and Procedures,

consisting of: Rule 1201, Discretion to Hold Hearing; Rule 1202,

Notice; Rule 1203, Petitions; Rule 1204, Answers to Petitions; Rule

1205, Function of the Board; Rule 1206, Appearances; Rule 1207, Service

and Filing; Rule 1208, Rejection of Documents; Rule 1209, Form and

Size; Rule 1210, Copies; Rule 1211, Subpoenas Rule 1212, Continuances;

Rule 1213, Request for Continuances or Time Extensions; Rule 1214,

Transcript and Record; Rule 1215, Conduct of Hearing; Rule 1216,

Presiding Officer; Rule 1217, Disqualification of Hearing Officer or

Board Member; Rule 1218, Ex Parte Communications; Rule 1219, Evidence;

Rule 1220, Prepared Testimony; Rule 1221, Official Notice; Rule 1222,

Order of Proceedings; Rule 1223, Prehearing Conference; Rule 1224,

Opening Statements; Rule 1225, Conduct of Cross-Examination; Rule 1226,

Oral Argument Rule 1227, Briefs; Rule 1228, Motions; Rule 1229,

Decisions; and Rule 1230, Proposed Decision and Exceptions. These rule

recissions were adopted by the AVAPCD on October 21, 1997 and submitted

by the California Air Resources Board to EPA on May 18, 1998.

II. Background

On January 4, 1999 in 64 FR 67, EPA proposed to rescind the rules

listed above from the AVAPCD portion of the California SIP.

EPA has evaluated all of the above rule recissions for consistency

with the requirements of the CAA and EPA regulations and EPA

interpretation of these requirements as expressed in the various EPA

policy guidance documents referenced in the Proposed rule cited above.

EPA has found that the rule recissions meet the applicable EPA

requirements. A detailed discussion of the rule provisions and

evaluations has been provided in 64 FR 67 and in the technical support

document (TSD) available at EPA's Region IX office dated September 22,

1998.

III. Response to Public Comments:

A 30-day public comment period was provided in 64 FR 67. EPA

received no public comments.

IV. EPA Action

EPA is taking final action to approve the recission of the rules

listed above from the AVAPCD portion of the California SIP. EPA is

approving the submittal under section 110(k)(3) as meeting the

requirements of section 110(a) and Part D of the CAA. This approval

action will rescind these rules from the federally approved SIP. The

intended effect of this action is to bring the AVAPCD SIP up to date in

accordance with the requirements of the Clean Air Act, as amended in

1990 (CAA or the Act).

V. Administrative Requirements

A. Executive Order 12866

The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has exempted this

regulatory action from Executive Order (E.O.) 12866, entitled

``Regulatory Planning and Review.''

B. Executive Order 12875

Under E.O. 12875, EPA may not issue a regulation that is not

required by statute and that creates a mandate upon a state, local, or

tribal government, unless the Federal government provides the funds

necessary to pay the direct compliance costs incurred by those

governments. If the mandate is unfunded, EPA must provide to the Office

of Management and Budget a description of the extent of EPA's prior

consultation with representatives of affected state, local, and tribal

governments, the nature of their concerns, copies of written

communications from the governments, and a statement supporting the

need to issue the regulation. In addition, E.O. 12875 requires EPA to

develop an effective process permitting elected officials and other

representatives of state, local, and tribal governments ``to provide

meaningful and timely input in the development of regulatory proposals

containing significant unfunded mandates.''

Today's rule does not create a mandate on state, local or tribal

governments. The rule does not impose any enforceable duties on these

entities. Accordingly, the requirements of section 1(a) of E.O. 12875

do not apply to this rule.

C. Executive Order 13045

Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety

Risks (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997),

[[Page 11774]]

applies to any rule that: (1) is determined to be ``economically

significant'' as defined under E.O. 12866, and (2) concerns an

environmental health or safety risk that EPA has reason to believe may

have a disproportionate effect on children. If the regulatory action

meets both criteria, the Agency must evaluate the environmental health

or safety effects of the planned rule on children, and explain why the

planned regulation is preferable to other potentially effective and

reasonably feasible alternatives considered by the Agency.

This rule is not subject to E.O. 13045 because it does not involve

decisions intended to mitigate environmental health or safety risks.

D. Executive Order 13084

Under E.O. 13084, EPA may not issue a regulation that is not

required by statute, that significantly affects or uniquely affects the

communities of Indian tribal governments, and that imposes substantial

direct compliance costs on those communities, unless the Federal

government provides the funds necessary to pay the direct compliance

costs incurred by the tribal governments. If the mandate is unfunded,

EPA must provide to the Office of Management and Budget, in a

separately identified section of the preamble to the rule, a

description of the extent of EPA's prior consultation with

representatives of affected tribal governments, a summary of the nature

of their concerns, and a statement supporting the need to issue the

regulation. In addition, Executive Order 13084 requires EPA to develop

an effective process permitting elected and other representatives of

Indian tribal governments ``to provide meaningful and timely input in

the development of regulatory policies on matters that significantly or

uniquely affect their communities.''

Today's rule does not significantly or uniquely affect the

communities of Indian tribal governments. This action does not involve

or impose any requirements that affect Indian Tribes. Accordingly, the

requirements of section 3(b) of E.O. 13084 do not apply to this rule.

E. Regulatory Flexibility Act

The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) generally requires an agency

to conduct a regulatory flexibility analysis of any rule subject to

notice and comment rulemaking requirements unless the agency certifies

that the rule will not have a significant economic impact on a

substantial number of small entities. Small entities include small

businesses, small not-for-profit enterprises, and small governmental

jurisdictions. This final rule will not have a significant impact on a

substantial number of small entities because SIP approvals under

section 110 and subchapter I, part D of the Clean Air Act do not create

any new requirements but simply approve requirements that the State is

already imposing. Therefore, because the Federal SIP approval does not

create any new requirements, I certify that this action will not have a

significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.

Moreover, due to the nature of the Federal-State relationship under the

Clean Air Act, preparation of flexibility analysis would constitute

Federal inquiry into the economic reasonableness of state action. The

Clean Air Act forbids EPA to base its actions concerning SIPs on such

grounds. Union Electric Co., v. U.S. EPA, 427 U.S. 246, 255-66 (1976);

42 U.S.C. 7410(a)(2).

F. Unfunded Mandates

Under Section 202 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995

(``Unfunded Mandates Act''), signed into law on March 22, 1995, EPA

must prepare a budgetary impact statement to accompany any proposed or

final rule that includes a Federal mandate that may result in estimated

annual costs to State, local, or tribal governments in the aggregate;

or to private sector, of $100 million or more. Under Section 205, EPA

must select the most cost-effective and least burdensome alternative

that achieves the objectives of the rule and is consistent with

statutory requirements. Section 203 requires EPA to establish a plan

for informing and advising any small governments that may be

significantly or uniquely impacted by the rule.

EPA has determined that the approval action promulgated does not

include a Federal mandate that may result in estimated annual costs of

$100 million or more to either State, local, or tribal governments in

the aggregate, or to the private sector. This Federal action approves

pre-existing requirements under State or local law, and imposes no new

requirements. Accordingly, no additional costs to State, local, or

tribal governments, or to the private sector, result from this action.

G. Submission to Congress and the General Accounting Office

The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. Sec. 801 et seq., as added

by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996,

generally provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency

promulgating the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy

of the rule, to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller

General of the United States. EPA will submit a report containing this

rule and other required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House

of Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States

prior to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. This rule is

not a ``major'' rule as defined by 5 U.S.C. Sec. 804(2).

H. Petitions for Judicial Review

Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean Air Act, petitions for

judicial review of this action must be filed in the United States Court

of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by May 10, 1999. Filing a

petition for reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule

does not affect the finality of this rule for the purposes of judicial

review nor does it extend the time within which a petition for judicial

review may be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such

rule or action. This action may not be challenged later in proceedings

to enforce its requirements. (See section 307(b)(2).)

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by

reference, Intergovernmental relations.

Note: Incorporation by reference of the State Implementation

Plan for the State of California was approved by the Director of the

Federal Register on July 1, 1982.

Dated: February 22, 1999.

Felicia Marcus,

Regional Administrator, Region IX.

Part 52, chapter I, title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations is

amended as follows:

PART 52 [AMENDED]

1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows:

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.

Subpart F--California

2. Section 52.220 is amended by adding paragraphs (c)(47)(i)(C),

(c)(65)(iii), and (c)(137)(vii)(D), and by revising paragraph (c)(65)

introductory text, to read as follows:

Sec. 52.220 Identification of plan.

* * * * *

(c) * * *

(47) * * *

(i) * * *

(C) Previously approved on May 9, 1980 and now deleted without

replacement for implementation in the Antelope Valley Air Pollution

Control

[[Page 11775]]

District Rules 1201-1205, 1209-1211, 1214, 1217, 1220-1221, and 1223-

1224.

* * * * *

(65) The following amendments to the South Coast Air Basin Control

Plan were submitted on July 25, 1979, by the Governor's designee.

* * * * *

(iii) Previously approved on September 28, 1981 and now deleted

without replacement for implementation in the Antelope Valley Air

Pollution Control District Rules 1206, 1208, 1212, 1213, 1215, 1216,

1218, 1219, 1222, and 1225-1230.

* * * * *

(137) * * *

(vii) * * *

(D) Previously approved on February 1, 1984 and now deleted without

replacement for implementation in the Antelope Valley Air Pollution

Control District Rule 1207.

* * * * *

[FR Doc. 99-5828 Filed 3-9-99; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P